Who We Are

An independent organization of leading scientists and journalists researching and reporting the facts about our changing climate and its impact on the public.

What We Do

Climate Central surveys and conducts scientific research on climate change and informs the public of key findings. Our scientists publish and our journalists report on climate science, energy, sea level rise. Read More

About Our Expertise

Members of the Climate Central staff and board are among the most respected leaders in climate science. Staff members are authorities in communicating climate and weather links, sea level rise, climate. Read More

U.S. State Department Delays Keystone XL Decision

By Bobby Magill

Published: April 18th, 2014

The U.S. State Department is indefinitely delaying its decision on whether to approve the controversial Keystone XL Pipeline to give federal agencies more time to review the proposal, the Associated Press reported Friday.

The delay could push the Keystone XL decision beyond the November midterm elections.

The AP reported that the State Department is citing a February decision by a Nebraska judge who overturned a state law allowing the pipeline to be built in the state. The State Department said the overturned law adds a new level of uncertainty regarding the route of the pipeline.

"The agency consultation process is not starting over. The process is ongoing, and the department and relevant agencies are actively continuing their work in assessing the permit application,” the State Department said in a statement.

The State Department did not say how much longer the review of the pipeline proposal would take, according to the AP.

Many scientists and environmentalists fear TransCanada’s proposed Keystone XL Pipeline could have serious implications for climate change. Each day, the proposed pipeline would pipe 830,000 barrels of crude oil along an 875-mile route from Alberta’s tar sands region to refineries along the Texas Gulf Coast, threading through eastern Montana, western South Dakota and central Nebraska before tying into an existing pipeline in Steele City, Neb.

The production and processing of a barrel of tar sands crude releases 17 percent more carbon emissions than the average barrel of crude produced elsewhere, according to the State Department’s Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the pipeline, released in January.

That analysis concluded that Alberta's tar sands would be produced with or without the Keystone XL Pipeline, suggesting that the effect on the climate would be the same regardless whether the pipeline is built.

The nonprofit group Carbon Tracker Initiative countered, saying in a report released in March, that the pipeline would lead to a greater quantity of carbon emissions globally than the State Department claimed.

North Dakota’s Bakken shale oil fields, one of the largest shale oil plays in the U.S., would also be connected to the Keystone XL Pipeline via a proposed spur.

A study released earlier this year showed that the Canadian government may have underestimated emissions of carcinogens known as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs, from the Alberta tar sands, and they may be a major hazard to both human and ecosystem health.

“The tar sands are a huge pool of carbon, one that it does not make sense to exploit,” they wrote. “It takes a lot of energy and water to extract and refine this resource into useable fuel, and the mining is environmentally destructive. Adding this on top of conventional fossil fuels will leave our children and grandchildren a climate system with consequences that are out of their control. It makes no sense to build a pipeline that would dramatically increase exploitation of this resource.”